 |
|
On the reforms track Iranian tussle |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Teaching days
Inherent potential of Pakistani move
Remembering Nissim Ezekiel
DATELINE WASHINGTON The real cost of air travel
|
On the reforms track THE hurriedly announced poll-eve decisions about Foreign Direct Investment are halting in nature. First, take the telecom sector. What was expected the most — raising the foreign investment cap to 74 per cent from the present 49 per cent — has not happened. The proposal was shelved at the last moment on the ground that the government needs more time to study its fallout. As a result, restricted competition and lack of cheaper foreign funds will delay cellphone tariffs’ downward journey. A fragmented national telecom market has already kept big foreign players from entering India. On the contrary, the strategic petroleum sector has been thrown wide open to foreign investment. There is no regulator in this sector, unlike telecom. The government attempts at disinvestment in the oil PSUs had often got embroiled in controversy. Yet at one go, the government allowed 100 per cent foreign ownership of refineries and marketing outlets, disregarding concerns expressed by many, including some coalition partners, about oil security and a monopoly situation emerging. The government, however, has kept the FDI cap in the public sector refineries at 26 per cent and expects the Competition Commission to check monopolies. With the government allowing foreign banks’ subsidiaries to buy out private banks in India, the public sector banks will feel the heat, specially in big cities. The foreign banks’ superior services and work culture will snatch high networth individual and corporate customers from government banks. The latter, not
known for efficiency and competitive spirit, are already hampered by the government compulsion of targeted lending. The present attempt at liberalisation in banking will be undermined by the government’s failure to raise the 10 per cent cap on voting rights. The government, in a hurry, perhaps forgot about it. |
|
Iranian tussle THE tug of war between the reformists, led by President Mohammad Khatami, and the hardliners in Iran has taken a new and serious turn. The cause is the debarring of a large number of reformist MPs by the Guardians' Council from contesting the February 20 elections. This has led to resentment in the affected camp, which has threatened to boycott the coming parliamentary (Majlis) polls. It has already organised a sit-in agitation inside the parliament building. There is the fear of street demonstrations by the reformists' supporters, comprising mostly youngsters. If this comes about, the situation may become difficult to tackle. Realising the serious implications of the issues involved, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has hinted that he may intervene for a compromise. But he wants those disqualified to contest the elections (80 MPs and 900 others) to look for only a legal remedy and eschew pressure tactics. His statement has come after he had a meeting with President Khatami and certain other senior reformist leaders. Perhaps, the aggrieved camp has agreed to this approach to end the standoff. This is evident from the President's appeal to his camp followers to maintain calm and avoid a confrontation. The President knows that the hardliners, who dominate the Guardians' Council, set up to screen the antecedents of those contesting the elections, are trying to misuse the institution to stop the march for reform, but he is helpless under the prevailing circumstances. For some time his popularity has gone down as many reformists have been exposed as the apologists for the theocratic regime. In any case, both sides believe that nothing should be done which threatens stability in a country already struggling to come out of a crisis over its nuclear programme. They also do not want to disturb their diplomatic drive aimed at mending Iran's relations with its West Asian adversaries as well as clinching a major trade agreement with the European Union, which has linked commercial issues to the political and human rights record. There can be a compromise despite differences between the rival groups. |
|
Teaching days THAT Panjab University has not been able to meet the University Grants Commission (UGC)-prescribed norm of 180 teaching days is a sad commentary on the functioning of the institution. The university has lost several days because of an agitation by students who have been protesting against a fee hike. For this, the authorities cannot be blamed. However, there is no doubt that official versions notwithstanding, the hosting of the Indian Science Congress further exacerbated the situation. University authorities, to their credit, rescheduled the winter break to make up for the time taken by the science congress, but they cannot take refuge in this alone, since they were well aware of the loss of more than 20 teaching days caused by the strike. The measures announced now, i.e. opening the institution for six days a week with only second Saturdays off for teaching and non-teaching departments, should have come into effect earlier, and this would have definitely helped the students. Though the norm was prescribed in 1998 when revised pay scales came into effect, there have been instances where classes have not been taken for the required number of days, both on the university campus, as well as in affiliated colleges. It is distressing that this is not a situation peculiar to Panjab University, but is widespread. To its credit, Panjab University had fulfilled the requirement in the last academic session, but that was an exception. While the academic calendar had fixed the requisite number of teaching days in this session, this was not enough, as no provision had been made for the science congress and, of course, the strike caused the interruption. At various times there have been statements by administrators and teachers that the norm is unrealistic. This does not seem so, and even if it is, educational institutions should aim higher, not seeking to lower the number of teaching days. Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go.
— T.S. Eliot
|
Inherent potential of Pakistani move
INDIA has an unparalleled opportunity today. No matter what compulsions or calculations made Pakistan respond enthusiastically to the Vajpayee initiative of April last year, the fact of the matter is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the architect of Kargil, is normalising relations with India — it can be friendship from the grassroots up if New Delhi works for it — at the latter’s terms. There should be no mistake that for the two governments the current normalisation effort is limited to where their ties stood on December 12, 2001. Just that. But Indian Prime Minister AB Vajpayee’s presence at the
SAARC Summit in Islamabad and his meeting with Musharraf have unleashed new forces of incalculable strength. It is up to India to take Pakistan along to wherever that vision takes. There is no doubt that currently an ineffable new spirit is aboard. Mr Yashwant Sinha noticed “winds of change” sweeping through the subcontinent. Pakistani officials do not tire of talking about the breakthrough that has been made. Pakistani media is partly ga ga over the peace prospects and partly reflects a strong backlash from the entrenched Right wing. Pakistan is as seriously polarised today as in 1971. A divided Right perceives a sellout of Kashmir by Musharraf and has mounted an insidious campaign against his entire new orientation. The Left-liberal regionalist schools strongly approve of Musharraf’s “opening to the east”. But they are bitter against him and the forces that sustain the military regime for harassing and suppressing them while advocating peace with India and ending the accompanying arms race. Time was when Benazir Bhutto tried to make up with India in 1989. She was called a security risk by the Army establishment and even Nawaz Sharif. But a decade later, the latter signed the Lahore Declaration with Mr Vajpayee which was the second major effort to bury the hatchet with India. The generals in Pakistan stabbed both governments in the back by Kargil operations. Now, they are at the helm of affairs and international developments and trends are forcing them to go and make up with India, Kashmir or no Kashmir. The old victim of the ruling establishment while supporting the new policy do not fail to say “I told you so” in varying words. But the forces trying to undermine the generally disliked military regime appear to perceive better the potentialities inherent in today’s limited moves, thanks to the emerging climate of expectations on both sides — than most formal supporters. The latter may not have grasped the full significance of what is happening in India: A Right-wing leader, reared by the BJP, is hoping to win an all-India election on the plank of making peace with Pakistan. The change that his campaign will bring about in the climate of opinion in India, more or less wholly unopposed, will open doors to a glittering prospect of a region-wide friendly cooperation in trade, economic development and cultural enrichment. South Asia can then stay at peace within itself, with fewer tensions. Pakistan was the sole
SAARC member which had held up its progress. It wanted an indeterminant amount of progress over Kashmir dispute with India before it will let
SAARC take the road most regional associations took, especially along the path charted by EU. But the over 50 years old policies have changed in the later half of 2003. The new world being created by George W. Bush of America has so frightened the ruling junta that it has said what was till then the unsayable. It is the Americans who have wrought this change not by direct arm-twisting but by media management. The steady leaks by the CIA over Pakistan’s proliferating activities in the atomic field vis-à-vis Afghanistan’s Taliban regime, nuclear technology for missiles deal with North Korea and more importantly with Iran have unnerved Islamabad. Pakistan’s name crops up whenever an Islamic terrorist is arrested or atomic proliferation story breaks. Islamabad’s new crash policy is to do all it thinks will please the yanks, but not for the sake of India,
SAARC or the region’s future. Which is where two facts are of crucial importance. The polarisation in Pakistan can still result in the abortion of new generally friendly moves towards India despite there being no other rational option for any Pakistan government. Not that progress in India can be trouble-free. There are powerful political, social and economic forces that fan hatred for Pakistan (and Muslims) for both political and economic reasons. They actually promote militarisation. Politics is accordingly adjusted. Economic development along today’s generally preferred lines enriches the favoured groups immensely. Demonising Pakistan fits in snugly. Bad relations with Pakistan are good news to some powerful individuals and Indian groups — just as anti-India sentiment in Pakistan enriches a certain class of Pakistanis. But in the case of Indians, this danger is relatively smaller. The same favoured groups, if deprived of the Pakistan baiting opportunities, can turn to other possible enemies or become the champions of the development of the more underdeveloped. Danger is far greater in Pakistan. For entrenched vested interests in a fundamentally underdeveloped Pakistan, there are few other options for crude or direct enrichment, except to go on beating the anti-Indian/Kashmir drum. Which is one reason for opting for apparently irrational courses as was the case in 1971. Ominously many politicians here have described today’s crisis to be as grave as 1971’s. India can seize the historic opportunity with enthusiastic and quick responses to Pakistan’s desperate-seeming overtures. That may make the current direction of events irreversible. No doubt, steps should be measured and responses require an interval for thinking and perhaps adjusting. But there are moments in history when sluggish responses can allow the opportunity to slip away. It should be the task of Indian policymakers to try and make the present policies of Islamabad look like succeeding in at least some cases and create a momentum in the forward movement of events. To suggest how to do this ought not to be for outsiders; government leaders and foreign service professionals are suited to do that. But one can point out the key areas where progress will make a direct impact: Nothing can be more spectacular than facilitating much freer people-to-people contacts and cultural exchanges. This means dramatically easier visas and the availability of inexpensive transportation and communications. Some grand (unilateral) gesture by India will morally force Musharraf to reciprocate. A desirable momentum of expanded contacts looks likely to enable both sides to stay the course. While attention is to be riveted on easily doable things, big and hard hurdles should not be forgotten. Two not-unrelated issues are the hardest to solve: one is the mischief the nuclear weapons play; no responsible Indian can forget that Pakistan’s atomic bombs can be loaded on to Ghauri missiles; Indian nukes are more or less ready too. These destroy trust radically. The contours of a relationship have to be agreed in which the two sets of nukes can either coexist or disappear. The second is Kashmir: neither can or will India cede it nor can Pakistan forget it. It has to be put in some framework of negotiations, official and non-official, that can meet either country’s minimum political requirements. The “vision thing” and its articulation can come in handy. What really is BJP’s, or others’, vision and what is in it for Pakistanis? The answer will decide much. |
Remembering Nissim Ezekiel FOR struggling artists, those were not the good old days. I am talking of seventies and eighties. For, in those days getting media reviews, which mattered a great deal in building an artist’s reputation, was a formidable task. Today even non-serious and novice brush-dabblers get plenty of press coverage. It is another matter that now no one, except the featured artists, takes these art-reviews seriously. In those days even a single line reference in an art-review, particularly by stalwarts like Charles Fabri, Richarad Barthalomew, Keshav Malik, Dr B.N. Goswamy and Nissim Ezekiel, used to make a considerable difference in an artist’s career. In 1983 my long-cherished dream was fulfilled when Nissim Ezekiel walked into my exhibition that I had organised at the Taj Art Gallery in Mumbai (then Bombay), on its concluding day. Though this frail looking but towering figure spent quite some time in my show he spoke to me only a couple of sentences. And I must confess that his limited but valuable lines changed my whole vision of art and set me on a very sound footing for my future art course. “The novel tells a story... That is the highest factor common to all novels, and I wish that it was not so, that it could be something different — melody or perception of truth. In this seemingly irrelevant saying what E.M. Foster wished in a novel, I aim at in painting”. This was the concluding paragraph of my long and laboured art-statement that I had pompously penned for my catalogue. Nissim read the lengthy statement rather attentively but without showing any expression on his thoughtful face. Then he went around the show spending quite some time before each of my works, (which I had “crafted” specially for the Bombay market — with forced-into motifs of Lord Ganesh in almost every canvas), again without displaying any visible expression. “Your views on art are appreciable”, he stated in a curt and cold manner while looking at my catalogue. This gave me quite a kick instantly. But his following sentence made me sink to such a level that I could not know when he left the gallery. “But there seems to be no connection with what you have stated and what you have painted”, was his concluding comment. However, his showing me the mirror at that juncture helped me to come out of the fallacious ivory tower that I had built, like majority of other artists who remain commercially successful but creatively infertile, around me. Since Nissim was known for not writing on art exhibitions that he did not like I was sure that he would not refer to my show in his weekly art column that was slated for publication, (I have forgotten the name of the daily he used to write for), on a particular day when I was scheduled to be back in Chandigarh. A couple of months later one of my acquaintances in Mumbai told me that he did read Nissim’s review of my show. On my asking for its cutting, which I would have loved to retain, he told me that it being downright “disparaging” he did not keep its cutting for me. Hoping that Nissim must be maintaining a record of his reviews I immediately wrote to him requesting for a copy of that piece. In my letter I reminded him of one of his earlier remarks about a fondly kept rejection slip that was signed by T.S. Eliot. “I tend to lose track of my writings, cuttings and other papers. A cursory glance at various packets of cuttings did not help me to find the one I (and you) wanted. I am sorry but there seems to be no way of tracing it. Incidentally, I don’t know where the T.S. Eliot rejection slip is either!”, was his quick response. Dear Mr Nissim, may heaven bless your soul, I have not lost track of your letter till date! It is my most cherished and proud possession! n |
DATELINE WASHINGTON OVER two years after the U.S.-led coalition toppled the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, the student militia is “alive and well.” This pronouncement from a senior United Nations official comes on the heels of a confident declaration by U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad that these “enemies of Afghanistan” were “losing.” In an interview from Kabul, Dr. Adam C. Bouloukos, officer in charge of the U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime (ODC) in Afghanistan, said the Taliban “never went away… they are alive and well.” He attributed their well-being to a flourishing drug trade in the country. In the backdrop of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, the opium trade has flourished. As the Taliban lost ground, opium poppy farmers made gains, and much of the profits from drug sales have gone back into the pockets of the warlords. Over the past month there has been a spike in attacks on coalition and Afghan forces, ostensibly the handiwork of the Taliban. “The links between drugs and terrorism are hard to quantify, but they are real,” says Dr. Bouloukos. In a country with a crippled economy and a central government that has limited authority outside of Kabul, drug money represents an easy way for warlords to fill their pockets and feed their men. Political analysts worry that the power vacuum left by the collapse of the Taliban is steadily being filled by drug cartels. If this situation persists, they predict that it will threaten the survival of a viable government in Kabul. The escalation in opium poppy crop cultivation has been well documented by both the Bush administration and the UN. According to a UN survey released by the ODC in October 2003, despite relatively intense eradication campaigns in Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan provinces, opium poppy cultivation has spread to new areas. UN investigators concluded that opium is being produced in 28 of Afghanistan’s 32 provinces. The acreage under production is up 8 percent over last year. The UN office in Kabul will release a “farmers’ intentions” study toward the end of this month. A report by the White House’s Office of Drug Control Policy revealed that Afghanistan’s opium poppy production doubled during 2003. The annual U.S. government estimate shows that approximately 61,000 hectares of poppy were cultivated in Afghanistan in 2003 compared with 30,750 hectares in 2002. The studies also reveal a general trend that increasingly farmers are cultivating opium poppy in remote and inaccessible areas. Staggered planting, a traditional practice in Afghanistan where long maturing varieties of opium poppy are planted in the fall season and short maturing varieties planted by the end of the winter, is on the rise. John Sifton, a researcher with the New York-based Human Rights Watch, frequently visits Afghanistan to monitor human rights conditions. Just back from Kabul, Mr Sifton says: “The people there are so poor that, naturally, they would rather grow poppy because of its significantly higher market value.” Afghanistan now has the dubious distinction of being the world’s largest opium producer, followed by Myanmar and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic. Regardless of the gravity of the situation, the war against drugs is not a priority for the coalition forces in the region. “They [the troops] have an anti-terrorism mandate,” says Dr. Bouloukos. White House officials site the “challenging security situation” in Afghanistan as having complicated the task of fighting a war against drugs alongside with the war on terrorism. “The security situation is not good because of interference from Pakistan where the Taliban and al-Qaeda remain based,” says Ambassador Peter Tomsen, a former U.S. special envoy to the Afghan Resistance (Mujahideen). Ironically, the present Afghanistan administration and the coalition forces’ ineffective crackdown on opium production is in marked contrast with the Taliban’s success. The Taliban banned cultivation for “a particular blip” of time, Dr Bouloukos says. “They often get too much credit for that.” He explained that the Taliban were “asked” by the international community to do something about women’s rights, human rights and drugs. “Items one and two were, naturally, non-starters for the Taliban. The drug problem was ‘easy’ by comparison.” There are two schools of thought on the matter — one that believes the Taliban clamped down on drugs because of strict Islamic principles that outlaw drug use; and the second, with which Mr. Tomsen concurs, that drug stocks got so huge that a ban would not cut into the Taliban’s profits. “Even though the production dropped, drug use was still up in Europe,” a main destination for opium produced in Afghanistan, he says. Drug addiction is spreading in Afghanistan where opium was initially used as a home remedy to stave off hunger and cold. “Drug use is very much on the increase,” says Dr. Bouloukos, “as one might expect in a post-war environment. All the post traumatic stress disorders exist here in large scale.” Drugs of choice, in order of use, include pharmaceuticals, Valium being a favorite, then hashish, opium and heroin. The problem has spilled over into neighboring Iran and Pakistan, and while Iran has taken strict measures to curb the problem, Afghan officials complain that Pakistan is abetting the situation. “The ISI [Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence], the Afghan warlords, the Russian army, the international mafia… they are all involved in the drug trade,” says Mr. Tomsen. In the face of these seemingly insurmountable obstacles, Mr. Karzai’s administration has pushed for the creation of a drug police and has passed a national drug control strategy. |
|
The real cost of air travel FLIGHTS on low-cost airlines for as little as one Pound Sterling — and in some cases absolutely free — have been widely advertised across Europe in recent years, with established airlines forced to slash their prices too. However, a return ticket with, for example, British Airways from London to Brussels for only Pounds Sterling 35 (on some flights) as opposed to the standard economy fare of more than Pounds Sterling 200 completely ignores the environmental cost of air travel. As the fastest growing source of emissions of greenhouse gases aviation is a major contributor to the global warming phenomenon. The UK’s Department of Transport estimates that current passenger flights generate more than eight million tonnes of carbon dioxide a year. With no alternative to aviation fuel, campaigners were pleased about the emphasis Tony Blair placed on the need for action on global warming when he spoke at the Earth Summit in Johannesburg in 2002. Crucially he said: ‘We know that if climate change is not stopped, all parts of the world will suffer. Some will even be destroyed....it means the world — the whole world — facing up to the challenge.’ From the perspective of environmental protection, campaigners see the solution as simple: tax aviation fuel making air travel more expensive and tax people out of the sky. But in a clear conflict of interest between the environment and economic growth, the UK’s aviation sector today continues to benefit from tax breaks and subsidies totalling roughly Pounds Sterling nine billion a year. Aviation fuel in the UK is not taxed. It costs 18 pence a litre to fill an aircraft’s tanks while the car travellers may use to reach the airport costs 78 pence to fill. This in part accounts for airlines being able to offer some flights so cheaply. Brendon Sewill, author of ‘The Hidden Cost of Flying’ (published by the Aviation Environment Federation) and a former UK government adviser, points to two reasons for taxing aviation fuel. The first is that those who choose to fly would be making some contribution to the cost of running some public services. Rail for instance causes eight times less carbon dioxide emissions than air travel and in the UK has been severely under-resourced for decades. The second reason is that it would help to ensure that aviation covers what lobby groups see as its massive environmental costs. These could be estimated, for example, in terms of the cost of tree planting, healthcare for children with asthma or the cost of cleaning streets and buildings beneath flight-paths. However, far from deterring air travel, the UK government has a policy of actively encouraging it, giving the go-ahead last month for developments at 20 airports in the UK, including a new runway at London-Stansted, with another at London-Heathrow at some point in the future not ruled out either. The environmental lobby has so far not managed to change this policy. In the UK, the British transport minister, Alistair Darling, says taxes cannot be imposed on aviation fuel because this requires an international agreement. Also a proposal by Friends of the Earth for imposing a tax on fuel for domestic flights has fallen on deaf ears. Elsewhere, Belgium has pressed for action on aviation taxes, but discussions have so far got nowhere. People might of course just get bored with flying and thereby provide something of an answer to the pollution question.
— The Guardian |
Whenever virtue subsides and irreligion prevails, I create Myself for the protection of the good; for the destruction of all immorality I am coming from time to time. — Shri Krishna in The
Bhagavadgita The Jnana Yogi says ‘I am He’. But as long as one has the idea of the Self as body, this egotism is injurious. It does not help one’s progress, and it brings about one’s ruin. Such a person deceives himself and others. — Sri Ramakrishna This earth is not alone our teacher and nurse. The powers of all the worlds have entrance here. — Sri Aurobindo Just as our God is an Impersonal and yet a Personal God, so is our religion a most intensely impersonal one — a religion based upon principles — and yet with an infinite scope for the play of persons; for what religion gives you more Incarnations, more prophets and seers, and still waits for infintely more? — Swami Vivekananda |
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Mailbag | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | National Capital | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
